A Canberra police officer sacked for using capsicum spray on a drunk man outside a Manuka nightclub has lost a fight against his dismissal.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Sergeant Brett Coutts was working with ACT Policing in May 2012 and was dealing with a drunk and possibly drug-affected man outside The Cabinet nightclub early on a Sunday morning.
The man was heavily intoxicated, with a blood-alcohol content of 0.12 and described as physically imposing and belligerent. Police had been called after allegations he had indecently assaulted a woman earlier in the night, placing a bloodied hand on her breast.
The Federal Court had heard evidence that the man was giving indications of violence and appeared to glare and flinch at the officer.
Sergeant Coutts said he thought he was going to be assaulted and used the capsicum spray to subdue the man before putting him in a headlock and into a cage on a police vehicle.
An internal investigation of Sergeant Coutts’ actions found he had improperly used force.
He was sacked for the excessive use of force but fought the decision through the Federal Court on a vast range of grounds.
The officer alleged he was denied procedural fairness, not given a fair hearing and was subjected to apprehended bias during the internal investigation.
Sergeant Coutts argued the Australian Federal Police’s decision-making process was flawed and ignored evidence that supported his actions.
He also argued his sacking was an abuse of power that was ‘‘otherwise contrary to the law’’.
The AFP, responding to the allegations, denied its decision-making process was flawed, pointing to, among other things, an independent review of the decision to dismiss Sergeant Coutts.
Justice John Griffiths handed down his judgment in the Federal Court on Monday after reserving his decision in late December. He described Sergeant Coutts’ legal challenge to the sacking as ‘‘a scattergun attack on the decision and the decision-making process’’, something he said was fraught with risk in an application for judicial review.
Justice Griffiths rejected Sergeant Coutts’ application on its multiple grounds but has not yet made a decision on court costs. He has given both parties time for further submissions. They will be made within the month.
